Posts Tagged ‘Big 4’
Minor updates while we wait for more news on the PCAOB leak to KPMG
Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.
There is little new information on the leak from PCAOB to KPMG since the first reports.
I’m expecting to hear a lot more, most likely after PCAOB and SEC finish their investigation. If I read this situation correctly, and if public reports are correct, there will be sanctions from SEC against some of the KPMG staff. At that point, the SEC public documents will tell us a lot more.
While we wait, here are two articles that give some general background.
4/17/17 – Francine McKenna at re:The Auditors – KPMG takes its turn with a Big 4-sized scandal – If you’ve been looking for an article with a long time horizon to survey the assorted scandals in the Big 4 world, this post will give you the deep background you want.
Leak from PCAOB to KPMG
Post describes the current information that is public on the leak of inspection engagements from someone at PCAOB to someone at KPMG. Article illustrates there still is not a lot visible in the public realm to answer all the questions that come to mind.
Ms. McKenna quotes my comment earlier on the PCAOB-KPMG leak feeling to me like a red flag of something deeper. She agrees with me.
Each firm has their own round of fiascos
All the firms have had their turn of embarrassing publicity, often with fines or undisclosed settlements.
Update on PCAOB leak to KPMG: 6 departed staff at KPMG were fired.
Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.
A minor update on the leak from a now-former PCAOB staffer to a now-former KPMG staffer giving advance notice of audits selected for inspection. Also, many questions come to my mind after thinking about this situation.
Previously mentioned this fiasco yesterday.
CFO.com provides some clarifying info from KPMG’s executive director of media relations and corporate communications: KPMG Replaces Audit Chair in Wake of PCAOB leaks.
The KPMG representative says that KPMG discovered the issue and notified the SEC and PCAOB.
Most significant piece of new information is that the six people who left the firm were fired.
They did not resign.
Why is this significant, at least to me? In the initial reports, I saw verbs used indicating all of the following possibilities for the partner’s departure. They may have:
- resigned (which means sorta’ kinda’ voluntary terminations), or
- were fired (which means the firm unilaterally terminated them), or
- departed (which doesn’t addressed which party made the termination decision; in other words could have been a summary firing, or truly voluntary, or under the proverbial threat of you-can-either-resign-or-I’ll-personally-throw-you-out-the-window).
At first read, I did not analyze which of the above options actually was in play. I put together all the reports I read and assumed (you know what that means) these were all forced resignations, as in “I think it’s time for you to resign.”
Other comments by the PR person confusing me are statements that the fireable offenses were possessing the leaked information or knowing others knew about it.
Another fiasco at KPMG
Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.
There is as much missing from reporting on this story as has already been made public.
Here is what I can figure out:
An employee of PCAOB leaked to someone at KPMG a list of audit engagements that were going to be inspected. Recipient of the leaked info was previously an employee at PCAOB.
Lots of stuff we don’t know happened next.
When someone told senior leadership at KPMG about this back in February, KPMG took several steps. They hired external legal staff to investigate, notified the PCAOB of the leaked info, and then fired 6 people.
Amongst the fired staff are
- two named partners, including the Vice Chair of Audit (who was in charge of all audit work in the US firm) and the national managing partner for audit quality and professional practice
- three other unnamed partners
- one other person, whose job level and responsibilities were not identified.
The leaker at PCAOB has resigned.
What is missing from the reporting?
What happened inside KPMG between the leak and the firings is not visible in the few articles I’ve found on the incident.
More on the ‘tipping point’ for Big 4 firms
Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.
If you casually pay attention to what is going on in the land of Big 4, a world far, far away from most of us in the accounting world, you might have interest in two recent articles from Jim Peterson, pondering the survivability of the huge firms. I will summarize what I think are a few highlights.
2/13 – Jim Peterson at Re:Balance – If the Big Four Went “Ex-advisory” – Deja Vu? Or Worse? – Regulators don’t like the huge consulting practices in the Big 4 and the partners in the Big 4 consulting arms don’t like the constraints on their growth, opportunities, and compensation from being tied to the audit & tax practices.
Article speculates on the impact if the consulting work were to be spun off, as happened back in 1998 through 2001.
Fun reading for accountants
Manual accounting records. Anyone miss those? Didn’t think so. Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.
A few fun reads for accountants:
- Why no Hollywood movie will ever show a profit.
- Adrienne Gonzalez is back at Going Concern, talking about the idea of TBTF Big 4 firms possibly, maybe, becoming SIFI (not likely to ever happen, but a fun read anyway).
- Talent shortage appearing in the CPA world.
- Research from Management of an Accounting Practice now available.
9/14/11 (yes, 2011) – The Atlantic – How Hollywood Accounting Can Make a $450 Million Movie “Unprofitable” – If you have never taken a look at the astoundingly creative accounting in Hollywood, this article will give you a superb introduction.
Several years ago I took a fraud education CPE course in which the instructor went on a tangent to explain why no Hollywood movie has ever made a profit and none of them ever will.
Yet another look at the big in the Big 4 – 2016 edition
Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.
I am constantly amazed at how massively big the Big 4 firms are in terms of revenue. Inside Public Accounting published their list of the 100 biggest accounting firms for 2016. This is quite current, since many firms have a May or June 2016 fiscal year-end.
Here’s the income number for the 10 largest firms, in millions of dollars, along with comparable data from a year ago: Read the rest of this entry »
Litigation cases that could possibly take down a Big 4 firm
Image courtesy of Adobe Stock.
If a judgment at trial were big enough, it could mean the end of a large firm. Writing on August 13th at Market Watch, Francine McKenna explains PwC faces 3 major trials that threaten its business.
That threaten its business phrase in the headline actually means could take down the entire firm.
There are three major cases, each with a serious enough impact, that an adverse ruling in any one could take out the firm. One is in court now, another expected next February, with the final one in court within a year.
Work with me as I try to process through the cases. Here is the thumbnail version.
Two lawsuits over one client
Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp allegedly generated massive amounts of fraudulent loans, a large portion of which were sold to Colonial Bancgroup. Both companies failed during the financial crisis.
PwC audited Colonial Bank and allegedly did not discover the bad loans that their client, Colonial Bank, bought from PwC’s non-client Taylor Bean.
